- Genre:religion
- Sub-genre:Biblical Studies / General
- Language:English
- Pages:332
- Paperback ISBN:9781736521151
Book details
Overview
Time Tested Tradition puts inherited calendar assumptions to the ultimate test: documented history.
For centuries, believers have accepted that Saturday is the biblical Sabbath, passed down in an unbroken chain from creation. But what if this tradition could be tested-and disproven-using the very historical events recorded in Scripture and confirmed by archaeology?
Daniel Larimer presents a systematic investigation that begins with a simple question: If we know the year of key biblical events with high confidence, what does the planetary week tell us about those days? The results are devastating for tradition.
Using multiple independent lines of evidence-Tiberius' 15th year, the 46 years of temple construction, Daniel's 490-year prophecy, the Jubilee cycle confirmed by Josephus, and a documented solar eclipse-the book establishes 32 AD as the year of the resurrection. But here's the problem: in 32 AD, traditional Jewish calendars place Passover on Monday or Tuesday. This makes it impossible for Jesus to rise "on the third day" under any reasonable interpretation.
The investigation goes deeper. Testing the Saturday Sabbath against the Exodus manna narrative (1446 BC), the Jordan River crossing (1406 BC), and both temple destructions reveals a consistent pattern: the continuous seven-day planetary week-with its origins in Egyptian astrology and Saturn worship-cannot be reconciled with Scripture's own testimony.
What emerges is a coherent alternative: the Lunar Sabbath, where Sabbaths fall on fixed days of each lunar month (the 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th). This system passes every historical test that Saturday fails, harmonizes the "three days and three nights" prophecy, and explains why Scripture repeatedly pairs "new moons and Sabbaths" as a single category of holy time.
Time Tested Tradition is not asking you to accept a new doctrine on faith. It provides the evidence and the methodology to verify every claim yourself. The question is not whether you're comfortable w
Read moreDescription
Time Tested Tradition puts inherited calendar assumptions to the ultimate test: documented history.
For centuries, believers have accepted that Saturday is the biblical Sabbath, passed down in an unbroken chain from creation. But what if this tradition could be tested-and disproven-using the very historical events recorded in Scripture and confirmed by archaeology?
Daniel Larimer presents a systematic investigation that begins with a simple question: If we know the year of key biblical events with high confidence, what does the planetary week tell us about those days? The results are devastating for tradition.
Using multiple independent lines of evidence-Tiberius' 15th year, the 46 years of temple construction, Daniel's 490-year prophecy, the Jubilee cycle confirmed by Josephus, and a documented solar eclipse-the book establishes 32 AD as the year of the resurrection. But here's the problem: in 32 AD, traditional Jewish calendars place Passover on Monday or Tuesday. This makes it impossible for Jesus to rise "on the third day" under any reasonable interpretation.
The investigation goes deeper. Testing the Saturday Sabbath against the Exodus manna narrative (1446 BC), the Jordan River crossing (1406 BC), and both temple destructions reveals a consistent pattern: the continuous seven-day planetary week-with its origins in Egyptian astrology and Saturn worship-cannot be reconciled with Scripture's own testimony.
What emerges is a coherent alternative: the Lunar Sabbath, where Sabbaths fall on fixed days of each lunar month (the 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th). This system passes every historical test that Saturday fails, harmonizes the "three days and three nights" prophecy, and explains why Scripture repeatedly pairs "new moons and Sabbaths" as a single category of holy time.
Time Tested Tradition is not asking you to accept a new doctrine on faith. It provides the evidence and the methodology to verify every claim yourself. The question is not whether you're comfortable with the conclusion-it's whether you're willing to let history speak.
Read more
